Before we stuff ourselves with stuffing and trim the tree this Thanksgiving, TIME asks some public figures—from Michelle Obama to Rick Warren to our astronauts orbiting Earth—to share what they're grateful for.

Chelsea Manning

I’m usually hesitant to celebrate Thanksgiving Day. After all, the Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony systematically terrorized and slaughtered the very same Pequot tribe that assisted the first English refugees to arrive at Plymouth Rock. So, perhaps ironically, I’m thankful that I know that, and I’m also thankful that there are people who seek out, and usually find, such truths. I’m thankful for people who, even surrounded by millions of Americans eating turkey during regularly scheduled commercial breaks in the Green Bay and Detroit football game; who, despite having been taught, often as early as five and six years old, that the “helpful natives” selflessly assisted the “poor helpless Pilgrims” and lived happily ever after, dare to ask probing, even dangerous, questions.

Such people are often nameless and humble, yet no less courageous. Whether carpenters of welders; retail clerks or bank managers; artists or lawyers, they dare to ask tough questions, and seek out the truth, even when the answers they find might not be easy to live with.

I’m also grateful for having social and human justice pioneers who lead through action, and by example, as opposed to directing or commanding other people to take action. Often, the achievements of such people transcend political, cultural, and generational boundaries. Unfortunately, such remarkable people often risk their reputations, their livelihood, and, all too often, even their lives.

For instance, the man commonly known as Malcolm X began to openly embrace the idea, after an awakening during his travels to the Middle East and Africa, of an international and unifying effort to achieve equality, and was murdered after a tough, yearlong defection from the Nation of Islam. Martin Luther King Jr., after choosing to embrace the struggles of striking sanitation workers in Memphis over lobbying in Washington, D.C., was murdered by an escaped convict seeking fame and respect from white Southerners. Harvey Milk, the first openly gay politician in the U.S., was murdered by a jealous former colleague. These are only examples; I wouldn’t dare to make a claim that they represent an exhaustive list of remarkable pioneers of social justice and equality—certainly many if not the vast majority are unsung and, sadly, forgotten.

So, this year, and every year, I’m thankful for such people, and I’m thankful that one day—perhaps not tomorrow—because of the accomplishments of such truth-seekers and human rights pioneers, we can live together on this tiny “pale blue dot” of a planet and stop looking inward, at each other, but rather outward, into the space beyond this planet and the future of all of humanity.

Chelsea Manning, formerly named Bradley, is serving a 35-year prison sentence at Fort Leavenworth for leaking hundreds of thousands of classified documents to the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks.

Tell us what you’re thankful for on Twitter using the hashtag #TIMEthanks

Under the Geneva Convention and international law established at Nuremberg in 1945-46, PVT. Manning was obligated to expose the war crimes she witnessed as a U.S. Army intelligence analyst. No oath of office, oath of secrecy or obedience relieves anyone of this obligation, as the convictions of the Nuremberg trials demonstrated. Furthermore, a retrospective analysis of the U.S. government's intentional manufacture of evidence to falsely justify the invasion of Iraq for geopolitical-economic gain constitutes an illegal war of aggression by current international standards. The exemption from accountability (impunity) the United States enjoys as a sole super power is the only thing preventing U.S. officials from being tried for crimes against humanity in the International Court of Justice. How is it just to imprison a soldier for exposing the crimes of their government? The conviction of PVT Manning was necessary to suppress any movement toward U.S. government accountability. PVT Manning is a great American patriot who is consciously sacrificing her life to defend the constitution of the United States, and the soul of her country.

And of course, we should give thanks for Chelsea Manning, whose act of selflessness and heroism has helped to save lives of so many. And whose continued bravery in all things public and "private" is truly inspiring.

I add YOU to the list of heroes, Chelsea, with Malcolm X, Dr Martin Luther King Jr, and Harvey Milk.

According to eQualityGiving.org, in Nov. 1977 Harvey Milk became not the first but the fifth openly LGBT person elected to public office in the U.S. He was preceded by Kathy Kozachenko (Ann Arbor City Council, Jan. 1974), Elaine Noble (Mass. House of Representatives, Nov. 1974), Allan Spear (Minn. State Senate, Nov. 1976), and Jim Yeadon (Madison, WI City Council, April 1977). Supervisor Milk was the first non-incumbent openly gay man elected in the U.S., but PVT Manning is remiss in overlooking these forerunners.

@PaxChristi– It is significant that nowhere during the long pretrial,
trial, and post-trial phases of Manning's court-martial did the soldier's
legal team even once so much as mention Nuremberg, much less invoke it as a
defense. Why do you suppose that is? Are Manning
and his lawyers so stupid as to have overlooked such an obvious defense? I
believe it's because your argument is specious in the extreme.

Manning's
lawyers would've had to demonstrate that the sketchy authority of the Nuremberg
Principles (derived under international law from
the 20th century's foremost display of victor's justice) somehow trumps U.S. law.
Since this court-martial was being conducted by the United States Army at Fort
Meade, Maryland—rather than at the International Criminal Court in The Hague,
Netherlands—Nuremberg did not and could not apply.

Moreover, writing about the helicopter attack
depicted in the notorious video leaked by Manning, sympathetic biographer and attorney Chase Madar commented,
"One might expect that such a graphic atrocity would be fodder for the
condemnation of the major human rights organizations—Amnesty International,
Human Rights Watch, Human Rights First—who monitor violations of the laws of
war. Not one of these groups has issued a statement on the massacre. … Why
haven't these human rights groups addressed the most vividly documented
incident of the military slaughter of civilians since the My Lai massacre? …
The reason for their silence is disquietingly simple: the gunship's actions
were, under the Rule of Law as codified and accepted in international
humanitarian law, perfectly legal."

Manning sacrificed her freedom but not her life; she left that to real warriors. And she acted not in defense of the U.S. Constitution but in abject betrayal of our nation's trust. This holiday, I give thanks Chelsea Manning is where she belongs.

@sfgkimroman publication in Time magazine doesn't lessen time spent in prison. Some things are deserved. Some folks are far too afraid to face themselves to find the will and understanding within themselves to support those who dare to throw their lives away for the betterment, no matter how small, of us all. It's a shame, really.

@LacyButterflyLiberationMacAuley Add to the list of people that has put your national security and the soldiers that help provide it at risk. Do you honestly think the US is the only country watching it's allies?!?! Please. As a disabled vet I find what he did downright wrong. There are somethings that need to remain private or forget any security in our nation.

Manning's attorney David Coombs sought to apply a Nuremberg defense strategy, but it was prohibited by the presiding Army Judge Col. Denise Lind. As you said, the trial was "conducted by the United States Army at Fort Meade, Maryland—rather than at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands— Nuremberg did not and could not apply." (victor's justice)

@chipin12 judging from the puny response here (scarcely a dozen comments in 4 days!), there's no evidence that
"millions" care what Chelsea thinks. I wish it were true—I've
written a book about Manning. But most Americans couldn't care less
about the WikiLeaks soldier, and they're probably right.

@Roni Neither our security nor any lives were put at risk by Manning's leaks. During the trial, a government witness testified that no lives were lost or endangered. So because others do wrong, that means it's okay for one to do the same? You don't see the irony in talking about how some things should remain private when you're defending the spying of, not just foreign governments, but every US citizen who uses the Internet or a cellphone?

As a disabled vet, you clearly don't see the bigger picture. Security at this time does not mean the same thing that it once did. The world is changing around you and you're blind to it.

@Roni @LacyButterflyLiberationMacAuley Thank you for your service. What do you think about the people who were running this country putting our men and women into an unwinnable situation without proper body armor or armored vehicles? Because that's what they did. What would you think if another country came into our country and did what we did in Iraq? Do you know what happened there? Have you read the book by Thomas Ricks, who interviewed hundreds of military men who were there in Iraq? It was an unmitigated disaster, according to them. Lots of them. Who put people at risk by sending them into that situation in the first place? And try to remember this. Manning was, is, a KID. He's so god damn young. I do think what he did was brave.

@PaxChristi that is simply untrue. I defy you to find even a single reference to Nuremberg among the exhaustive online archive of pretrial documents maintained by independent journalist Alexa O'Brien, or within the verbatim trial transcripts posted by Freedom of the Press Foundation. Whatever strategy you're referring to did not involve Nuremberg, since that word never appears anywhere in the Manning court-martial record. For Coombs to have been forbidden to invoke a Nuremberg defense, he would first have had to bring it up. Neither he, his fellow defense lawyers, nor Manning ever did so. It went entirely unmentioned, and for good reason. Manning was not being tried as a war criminal.

@ManningTrial I don't have to read your trash to know exactly where it goes and what it says because your obnoxious tweets and comments are so much like so many other close-minded "patriots" that it's obvious what kind of content you spew out. Re-hashing the same 'ol crap that's been successfully refuted by peoople you don't bother to listen to. I used to chalk all this "police" and "surveillance" state stuff up to paranoia up until I read the raw materials provided by Wikileaks and the revelations made by Snowden, so you can stuff your baseless insults of blindedness and closed mindedness.

I've provided plenty of argument and the evidence is apparent. Instead, it is you who fails to address much of anything. Wouldn't expect anything less from a government apologist and hack.

@g370u7455
thanks for your reviews of books you haven't read. And you call me a hack? You
seem to be a freelance apologist for Manning, blinded by your own self-righteousness. You don't counter
my points with evidence or argument. All you do is repeat your mantra that I
"have nothing of value to offer." You no doubt take comfort in your
closed mind, but others may judge for themselves who is better informed on this
subject.

@ManningTrial Laughably obvious angles of attack in this and previous works of yours. It's obvious that you're a hack who writes with his gut and not his head and heart. Being "the first book" is not an accomplishment. On the contrary, it often means it is the least informed and most useless volume on its subject.

It appears you take a great interest in Manning's gender identity, believing it somehow has relevance in all this. Just further proof that you have nothing of value to offer on anything related to Manning.

@g370u7455
thanks for asking for the title, but all you had to do is click on my avatar for that info. My book is called "Manning: The Soldier Who Leaked on
His/Her Country," and is available at Amazon. It's the first book to
thoroughly examine Manning's 12-week trial, the first to retrace the step-by-step
revelations of the soldier's conflicted gender identity, and the first to
challenge Manning's mythical martyrdom.

@ManningTrial You haven't written a book on Manning. If you did, share the title. More Americans are showing concern every passing day about the revelations that Snowden and Manning and others have provided.

@Cynthia_Burkey thanks
for reinforcing my point: 663 + 2,800 = 3,463, which is a whopping 996,537 short of the
first among those phantom "millions" of supporters touted by @chipin12.
This is consistent with the various online petitions requesting a pardon and/or
clemency for PVT Manning, including two at the White House's "We
The People" website. None of those attracted more than a few thousand adherents.

The idea behind "We The People" petitions is that if one meets a threshold
of 100,000 signatures within 30 days, White House staff will review it, forward
to appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response. However, when
the deadline for each rolled around, neither Manning petition had garnered even
10,000 signatures, much less 100,000.

I don't dispute the energy and commitment
of the few Americans who do support Manning, but in the grand scheme of things,
their numbers are paltry.

@Cynthia_Burkey – Manning
is no kid. In 2½ weeks he'll be age 26. When he methodically disclosed three-quarters
of a million U.S. government documents that he had sworn to protect, Manning
was 22. Three years later, during his February 2013 confession in open court, the
soldier declared, "The decisions that I made to send documents and
information to WikiLeaks were my own decisions, and I take full responsibility
for my actions."

Why not take Manning at his word? Whether you consider
him a man or a woman, you ought to at least accept this person as a responsible adult who
stands convicted of serious offenses against the country that trusted him.